gun control:i dont understand...

catefrances

... in the aftermath of these mass killings that occur, what is done to address the problem? is anything at all done? any soul searching? any tightening of the laws? or do you all stand behind the 2nd amendment figuring that something that was possibly relevent over 200 years ago still has the same relevence today?

Ahnimus

I don't think it has anything to do with laws. It's all about societal ignorance and selfishness. Individualism.

In light of the recent conference on religious beliefs that I posted http://www.thesciencenetwork.org/beyondbelief2/ it could be argued that the degradation of religious institutions increases individualism and selfishness. However, the reverse of degradation has occured in the United States.

dunkman

i dont understand either... the need to arm myself against an enemy within doesnt enter my mindset.. but i tell ye this, i am becoming less sympathetic to these shootings as time goes by... sure its sad and overwhelming in tragedy... but the very laws that allow guns allow murder on this scale... this can be seen in looking at other countries handgun crime stats... in the US the overall firearm-related death rate among U.S. children less than 15 years of age was nearly 12 times higher than among children than the next 25 industrialised nations COMBINED...



Every day 8 children ages 0-18 are killed by guns in the United States. (National Center for Health Statistics-2004)

Every 9 days a North Carolina child age 0-17 is fatally shot. (NC Office of the Chief Medical Examiner-2005)

blondieblue227

people say why change over a random happening.

it isn't random anymore in my opinion.

SO DO SOMETHING!!!!

TrixieCat

I support the right to arm bears.


It is a little more difficult than saying, "Hey, this really needs to be changed"

It was discussed recently how difficult it is to get a bill through congress...what with all the other crap that gets attached to it.
Ok, you want better gun control??? Only if you pass a the addendum to allow pro-lifers to smuggle crack into the NICU of every hospital in the country so the nurses can supplement their income.

onelongsong

catefrances wrote:

... in the aftermath of these mass killings that occur, what is done to address the problem? is anything at all done? any soul searching? any tightening of the laws? or do you all stand behind the 2nd amendment figuring that something that was possibly relevent over 200 years ago still has the same relevence today?

sure; we're going to disarm innocent citizens because we can't disarm criminals; and create a massive black market for guns so EVERY criminal can be armed. that way innocent citizens will be at the mercy of the criminals but we'll be able to appease the bleading hearts that live nowhere near the us.

catefrances

TrixieCat wrote:

I support the right to arm bears.


It is a little more difficult than saying, "Hey, this really needs to be changed"

It was discussed recently how difficult it is to get a bill through congress...what with all the other crap that gets attached to it.
Ok, you want better gun control??? Only if you pass a the addendum to allow pro-lifers to smuggle crack into the NICU of every hospital in the country so the nurses can supplement their income.

i remember the last time australia had a mass shooting. the entire country went into deep mourning and did a whole lot of soul searching. we realised that we didn't want this to happen ever again. so a weapons control was brought in. not every one supported it of course. and i personally know people who are still possession of their weapons. but a change was made and it was for the benefit of the entire population.
i guess the major difference between the United States and Australia is that not only do we not have the right to bear arms, we dont even have a bill of rights.

catefrances

onelongsong wrote:

sure; we're going to disarm innocent citizens because we can't disarm criminals; and create a massive black market for guns so EVERY criminal can be armed. that way innocent citizens will be at the mercy of the criminals but we'll be able to appease the bleading hearts that live nowhere near the us.

who said anything about appeasing the bleeding hearts that live nowhere near the US? i was just wondering about the mindset of the american people when these shootings occur. im trying to understand why nothing appears to ever be done to curb the enthusiasm for guns that american society seems to have. as an outsider i can tell you that we look at the United States and wonder what the fuck it would take for a change to happen.

onelongsong

catefrances wrote:

who said anything about appeasing the bleeding hearts that live nowhere near the US? i was just wondering about the mindset of the american people when these shootings occur. im trying to understand why nothing appears to ever be done to curb the enthusiasm for guns that american society seems to have. as an outsider i can tell you that we look at the United States and wonder what the fuck it would take for a change to happen.

it will take a revolution; and those with the guns will win. why don't we ban fuckin cars when a drunk driver kills a family?

catefrances

onelongsong wrote:

it will take a revolution; and those with the guns will win. why don't we ban fuckin cars when a drunk driver kills a family?

calm down will you. all im asking about is what goes through the citizenry's head. im not talking about banning weapons. im interested in the thought processes, nothing else.

810wmb

right!

ban twinkies because people are fat!

ban everything....shit, people won't be happy until the gov't takes control of everything and wipes for them

810wmb

catefrances wrote:

calm down will you. all im asking about is what goes through the citizenry's head. im not talking about banning weapons. im interested in the thought processes, nothing else.

we think, "what a fucked up dude"

we don't go throwing our guns in the river

Ahnimus

onelongsong wrote:

it will take a revolution; and those with the guns will win. why don't we ban fuckin cars when a drunk driver kills a family?

I don't think people are gonna understand the American right to bear arms and why it exists.

Although, ironically, the type of government the founding fathers feared is precisely the type of government you have now in the USA.

Personally I'm tired of discussing how gun control is the solution, because it's not, it has almost nothing to do with the problem.

It's a syllogistic error

A) Person dies from gun shot
Guns kill people
C) Deaths are caused by guns

Newton's first law of motion: An object at rest stays at rest.

A gun will never fire unless something causes it to fire. The protoypical case would be a human being pulling the trigger with their finger. But a human being is also an object subject to Newton's first law. A force must act on the human being for the human being to pull the trigger. Ad infinitum.

It seems that some people want to focus on guns as the first cause, when in actuality there may not be such a cause, or such a cause might be God. Nevertheless, the cause which should be identified is the force which acts on the human, since the human could use a Gun, a Knife, Poison, or any other number of things to facilitate the actions which they are motivated to perform.

catefrances

Ahnimus wrote:

I don't think people are gonna understand the American right to bear arms and why it exists.

Although, ironically, the type of government the founding fathers feared is precisely the type of government you have now in the USA.

Personally I'm tired of discussing how gun control is the solution, because it's not, it has almost nothing to do with the problem.

It's a syllogistic error

A) Person dies from gun shot
Guns kill people
C) Deaths are caused by guns

Newton's first law of motion: An object at rest stays at rest.

A gun will never fire unless something causes it to fire. The protoypical case would be a human being pulling the trigger with their finger. But a human being is also an object subject to Newton's first law. A force must act on the human being for the human being to pull the trigger. Ad infinitum.

It seems that some people want to focus on guns as the first cause, when in actuality there may not be such a cause, or such a cause might be God. Nevertheless, the cause which should be identified is the force which acts on the human, since the human could use a Gun, a Knife, Poison, or any other number of things to facilitate the actions which they are motivated to perform.

oh i understand why the right to bear arms exists.
and i get that a gun is by itself incapable of killing people. again i reiterate, tis the mindset of the people im interested in. do you all think ah fuck it another loony on the loose? if only access to guns was stricter...? do you wonder what the fuck was going through the shooters head? do you wish something was done about the arms trade? what the hell goes through your mind?

TrixieCat

catefrances wrote:

oh i understand why the right to bear arms exists.
and i get that a gun is by itself incapable of killing people. again i reiterate, tis the mindset of the people im interested in. do you all think ah fuck it another loony on the loose? if only access to guns was stricter...? do you wonder what the fuck was going through the shooters head? do you wish something was done about the arms trade? what the hell goes through your mind?

You are asking a bunch of people on a message board what goes through their mind??? What do you want us to say? What do you Think goes through our minds when a random shooting occurs, or someone open fires in a school or in a shopping mall????
Do you think people are all whooping it up and yelling "awesome!!!!!!!!!!! gimme some more beer cleetus! Let's go shoot ourselves some more innocent folk!"

Do we all think ah fuck it??? Please stop defining our country through laws and bills that are so antiquated they barely take women into account.

g under p

Maybe this could be another side of the equation: The High Cost Of Manliness.

Peace

onelongsong

810wmb wrote:

we think, "what a fucked up dude"

we don't go throwing our guns in the river

sorry for blowing up. i'm having a rough day.
shite like that doesn't happen in states that allow their citizens to carry conceald weapons. so if we want to use logic; we should arm everyone.
i had a nice conversation with jeremy on a thread the other day. he lives in south london and has shootings around his uni. he worries about walking home from the pub at 1:00 am wondering if he's walking down the wrong street or if the bloke on the corner is going to fancy his wallet; etc etc.
so; is jeremy a liar because the uk banned guns; or does it figure that when you disarm honest citizens; only criminals have guns?

Ahnimus

catefrances wrote:

oh i understand why the right to bear arms exists.
and i get that a gun is by itself incapable of killing people. again i reiterate, tis the mindset of the people im interested in. do you all think ah fuck it another loony on the loose? if only access to guns was stricter...? do you wonder what the fuck was going through the shooters head? do you wish something was done about the arms trade? what the hell goes through your mind?

I actually have a pretty good idea of why it happens. But then, I've spent a lot of time studying it. My explanation is rather counter-intuitive, because it doesn't appeal to supernaturalism. The explanation is quite natural and draws on different theories from Chaos Theory to Inter-Group Hostility. It's really the realm of criminology. The solution is unlikely to ever occur because it requires participation and education of the public at large. The public doesn't want to take any responsibility for these incidences, instead they look to things like gun laws.

I've gone in-depth on Cho, the Virginia Tech killer and many other such people on this very forum. But these types of discussions are typically ignored and the popular gun debate rages on.

Ahnimus

onelongsong wrote:

sorry for blowing up. i'm having a rough day.
shite like that doesn't happen in states that allow their citizens to carry conceald weapons. so if we want to use logic; we should arm everyone.
i had a nice conversation with jeremy on a thread the other day. he lives in south london and has shootings around his uni. he worries about walking home from the pub at 1:00 am wondering if he's walking down the wrong street or if the bloke on the corner is going to fancy his wallet; etc etc.
so; is jeremy a liar because the uk banned guns; or does it figure that when you disarm honest citizens; only criminals have guns?

Initially I found the argument to be interesting. If everyone had guns criminals wouldn't kill. But then I realized that it is erroneous in the same regard as the anti-gun argument. Both make the assumption that guns are the problem. If I was a person who deliberately intended to destroy multiple lives in a public setting and I knew that civilians would also be armed, I would take precautionary measures. Perhaps I would use a bomb instead. I've personally acquired several military handbooks online, including the SAS and GSG-9. Both of which have instructions for constructing incendiaries from household materials. Availability is not the problem from any angle.

blondieblue227

what about this view:

not letting needy/troubled kids slip thru the system? ......who grow up and sometimes turn into mad gun men.

810wmb

onelongsong wrote:

sorry for blowing up. i'm having a rough day.
shite like that doesn't happen in states that allow their citizens to carry conceald weapons. so if we want to use logic; we should arm everyone.
i had a nice conversation with jeremy on a thread the other day. he lives in south london and has shootings around his uni. he worries about walking home from the pub at 1:00 am wondering if he's walking down the wrong street or if the bloke on the corner is going to fancy his wallet; etc etc.
so; is jeremy a liar because the uk banned guns; or does it figure that when you disarm honest citizens; only criminals have guns?

umm, was directed towards cate maybe?

hell, i'm with you!